Spokane Planning Commission recommends update to Complete Streets ordinance

The Spokane Planning Commission on Wednesday, June 11, voted to recommend adoption of updates to the city’s Complete Streets ordinance, a revision staff and commissioners said modernizes standards and could improve Spokane’s competitiveness for state transportation grants.

The update — presented to the commission by city staff member John Snyder — revises language last changed when the ordinance was adopted in December 2011, clarifies how projects are defined, and adds references to newer plans and commissions created since 2011. Snyder said the Transportation Improvement Board indicated the draft could improve Spokane’s score for an August 15 grant round if adopted quickly: “This is an update from almost 15 years ago,” John Snyder said.

The changes matter because they affect how the city designs and funds street work for people who walk, bike, drive and use transit and because the Transportation Improvement Board’s grant scoring was cited as a near-term deadline. Snyder told the commission the update also makes the ordinance more consistent with current local practice and with state grant expectations.

In the hearing the commission discussed one key substantive exception in the draft: a definition that excludes paving of unpaved streets from the definition of a “street project” covered by Complete Streets requirements. Commissioner Schuck suggested removing the clause that exempts paving unpaved streets, saying: “I just making a suggestion that we, consider striking the, paving unpaved streets as part of the street project.” Commissioners and staff debated the trade-off: leaving the exemption makes it easier and less costly to pave many unpaved streets (including when done via local improvement districts), while removing it could require sidewalks, bike facilities or drainage work and raise costs for residents and the city.

Snyder and other commissioners explained the intention behind the current wording. Snyder said staff wanted to keep the bar low for paving unpaved streets so the city could more quickly address a widespread need for paving, noting the city previously budgeted about $250,000 per council district for paving programs that were scaled back during budget shortfalls. Commissioner Lenhart explained the practical effect: if paving unpaved streets were captured as full “street projects,” local improvement districts and other paving efforts could become more expensive because they might be required to add sidewalks, bike lanes or other improvements.

A member of the public, Paul Cropp, urged clearer process language for exceptions and asked procedural questions about how exceptions would be requested and reviewed: “How are requests for exceptions from the complete street standards made?” he asked. Cropp recommended clearer gatekeeping steps and more explicit public notice when exceptions are sought.

Commissioners debated whether to accept suggested wording from Cropp and others. Commissioner (name recorded as) moved to add a finding directing city staff to review Paul Cropp’s suggested language changes to code section 17-802-0055 (subsections a1–a4). That amendment failed on a voice vote; commissioners recorded four nays against the amendment. Following further discussion, the commission took a roll-call vote and recommended adoption of the ordinance as written and presented. The commission chair recorded multiple “aye” votes and the motion passed; the public record indicates one commissioner experienced a connection freeze during the roll call and staff later confirmed the motion passes.

Planning staff said the next step is a hearing before the PIES Committee and then City Council; Snyder noted that if the commission forwards the recommendation on schedule, the city could take advantage of the Transportation Improvement Board grant scoring for the August 15 round. Commissioners and staff also noted that some language clarifications and future adjustments could be revisited in later code updates or through staff guidance.

The Planning Commission closed the public testimony and moved the recommendation forward; the matter will be considered by the PIES Committee and then by the Spokane City Council.